Re: errrr...ooops. I wont say much here.

> >I could be wrong.
> >but in the tutorals for automatic pipe routing,..there are virtually
> >no spec or selection for different types and alloys of pipe, say type
> >L, M or k for copper, hard or soft drawn....but instead dialog boxes
> >where you are expected to fill in the ID, OD etc and bend
> >radius....and say flared options shown for large diameter hard drawn
> >tube...thats not even possible... and no compression fitting
> >optons..etc. you have one option in 'steel pipe'... steel.
> >wonderful, no ss mo alloys, no ansi stanard options are listed in the
> >ppe routing, where it seems like a must... the tutorial does however
> >let you select 45 degree flared connection for 1" copper. for a
> >fitting pictured as an obvious compression fitting, not a flare
> >fitting or flare nut etc. (you wouldnt do that on 1" anyway..I would
> >be surprised if they even make a 1" hard copper flare fitting (7/8"
> >is the largest ive seen, and only for soft copper)
> >Im either missing something big time....or there are serious issues. >
> Is this with (snipped) or your new thing?
> If with (snipped) what does the VAR say?
He is defensive...
Do you have attributes/properties with (snipped)? I'd expect something
> similar for storing non-geometric entity data.
> I'd think fittings to be library components though perhaps the
> piping package would use them if it finds the library ... check
> your install options again.
I will be doing that monday...however for the specialty feature you
know that Im interested in
they have no libraries yet...most of those are just 'parts' earlier
said to be importable, now
not so importable. it appears you can import someone other programs
single solid, but apparently
not an 'assembly'' for insance no the same vendors frame or pipe
routed drawings...those have to stay in plain
vanilla. On inquiry thats not going to change anytime soon.
also... when it comes to editing a single problem...put
that piece in a large assembly with
50 different connections... the connections preclude that same change.
still I can make that work to my benefit but its beyond the scope of
their canned tutorials...
I will be
pressing that point next should go OK...but I am returning
their pipe and wire routing programs,
not even remotely close to what IV had.. I dont think I wll be
changing my mind either...but who knows.
the company introduced their guys recently...on a vid.. two looking and I like parts of their
I was however driving past AutoDesk in San Rafael calf last week, lo
and behold, half a mile from what I
thought was their main huge building complex was a nest of several
other huge buildings, and a mile from there are 4 more
huge buildings, 4 stores tall, 400 to 600' long... and more huge
buildings down the road.... and thats just in San Rafael.
maybe it takes more than two guys to sort some of this stuff
out...maybe even 4 or 5 guys do you think?

> Would anybody but banquer use flared on hard copper?
that entire dialog box and list of tube available looked like a total
newbie got ahold of a chinese proctology specialty tube catalog that
he didnt understand, and cloned its optons as what you would need to
run tube in an industrial enviornment....
left me breathless ... and that passed their QC and management?
and is presented as a state of the art pipe routing program? ...
so now I have red flags by the bushel.
None the less if the feature you know I want can be made to work (as I
had planned on from the start), Id be weilling to junk the rest just
for that capabilty.
It is just that they will have to provide some correct and functional
tutorials, and skip the goal of teaching 38 things in one video. with
crucial data missing, .along with the sales pitch, sure as hell not
missing...and instructions to 'press the OK button' when there is
none.... or a help menu thats supposed to be context sensitive but
gives you help menu's and instructtions that do not fits the screens
and mode you are in...
there are 8 different major modeling and assembly modes you can be
in... and dozens of sub modes, all dragging up the *same help
insructions.. none telling you whch mode you have be in for the
instruction to be relevant... no screen shots for you to indentify
your correct mode or not... etc....
it took a day to sort out which one was appropriate for what mode I
was in....sorted out by trying them all, and noticing which menu
options fit one of the options and how to do it instructs. with
bugs, such as go to 'groups'/ environs.
well fine, there is no 'groups' tab... what they meant was find the
environs tab... they were calling all the stuff inside the environs
tab a group.. but you will never find group mentioned in any
menu. so you will not find a 'group' tab. that sort of thing.
it will be a job to sort out I know, but if not sorted out, will
preclude any sort of growth into the modeling market....imo.
those folk have a lot of work to do....I will suffer with them for a
bit, but not if I get arrogance and demands for first rate maintenance
fees as I suffer
with their own errors... if they want to stay in business that aspect
of their act will need a serious revamp.
My calls to that quarter of the company convinced
me that no such change is even remotely in the offing.... I thanked
the man for his time graciously, even though he had been arrogant and
rude...I said he had helped me make up my mind and thanked him
again... he stuttered a bit as I hung up.
I dont want to mention any names until the scene comes clear, and what
can or cannot be done is sorted this point for the record it
could be any one of 5 solids modeling options ive been working
with. Next will be a cheapie... but well established turboCAD...
it has a large world wide following... must be a reason for that... I
might well be able to suffer its limitations...which I notice are fast
dissapearing with each iteration.
Phil scott
> Cliff- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
the jury is definitely still out...I am a green as grass newbie idiot
when it comes to
solid modeling...but also wasnt born last week... I can see if a
tutorial is simply bogus
after a while, or zoom in on part that is supposed to be a fitting and
see that it was only
a fast sketch mock up at best...etc... and I can see if the tutorial
says 'now click the OK' button..
and there is no OK button... just a 'proceed with next interation'
button or some such idiocy.
that tells me, no proof reading, no testing to insure it works, no
caring if it works, a willingness to
lie and say it works when sure as hell it cant work as they are
telling you. Combined that is not
my style and does not work to make me viable in my business.
The tactic has been the easy way out...'oh just do these tutorials and
you will be able to sort out the rest for
yourself'.... not so. thats like me telling a 2 year old 'here
read these 35 encyclopedia's and you will be able
to sort the rest out yourself'....not hardly.
or teaching fully 20 different things in one tutorial, 5 different
ways, and all sorts of caveats...and then expecting retention.
Retention is accomplished 100% by teaching one thing at a time,
burning that in, then teaching one other thing....
also delivering a sales pitch and bragging on the capabilitiies etc.
in the middle of an instructional tutorial clouds the issue and makes
learning more difficult.
that said, I am coming along despite the issues, of which I was told
there were none... you know how that is... then now In told..
"oh we are fixing that in the next release'...
integrity works better. Bugs I understand and can cope with...but
trying to hide them just makes matters worse. Making the demo'
vids look easy, is also understandable but its works
for a corporation maybe...but for me I need the the straight dope,
fast and clean...bugs and all... then I can steer around them.
I am still trying to fathom what happens in this culture...I think the
rush to get a product
to market in its buggy form takes precident over getting it out
perfect, when perfect will never happen ..... in the
meantime the competition gets a product out and some people hooked on
so we get marketing spin... that can and has been fatal for many
also what works for a corporate engineering dept, with deep pockets
and maybe just a few products..
they can hire guys to spend a year full time learning how to do a few
simple things.
us entrepreur types need to rock and roll fast... the teaching styles
are different, and so is
the sales cannot be as tolerant of non workabiity or a
slow learning curve.
Phil scott
4 or 5 guys and 30 + years
Reply to
Loading thread data ...
"4 or 5 guys and 30 + years" is the only content I put in that post. The rest was from the post that was responded to.
Reply to
Reply to
I guess I could delete the irrelevant junk from the original post.
Reply to

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.